Robert Byers October 15, 2012 at 4:48 pmF0r the rec0rd YEC be1ieves in a bibica1 f100d.S a creatures m0ved t0 their h0mes frm a singe starting pace.S it cud ny be that is1ands were c010nized by migrat0ns and n0t specia1 creati0ns.I sh0udnt have t0 say this but Darwin and 0thers seem t0 think they make a g00d case because its n0t a g00d case t0 have critters n i1sands 0ut 0f n0where!

Big UD purge? I went there for the first time in 4 years yesterday, and it looked different. No energy, or something.

Oh wait. Was KairosFocus even around back then? Do you even know about Gordon E. Mullings of Manjack Heights, Montserrat, AKA KairosFocus, AKA GEM of TKI, AKA Gem of Talky, AKA Child-porn Collector?

I do remember him. he was already many of those things when I had to bail. So is barry still in charge over there? is denyse around? dave scott popped up anywhere? What's this about dembski and the flood?

2InVivoVeritasOctober 15, 2012 at 5:28 pmJonathan MI.D. itself, of course, has nothing to say about the nature or identity of the designer — these are inherently secondary metaphysical questions...We appreciate bringing to our attention the pronouncements of these very prominent christian / ID personalities. But I would appreciate if you can forgive me for expressing some criticism on the final statement in your text....I think we commit a common error when we say that “ID has nothing to say about the nature of the designer”. I believe ID is in a position to say some substantial things about the “nature of the designer” – assuming that the designers for the following are one and the same designer:...– the miracle of life– cells, tissues, organs, brains, eyes, vision systems, whole organisms– the humans – the beauty of the human body and human face– the miracle of human reason, thinking, conscience and soul– planet Earth with its metallic, magnetic core, tectonic plates, oceans– multiplicity of wonderfully inter-related echo system on our planet– the beauty and complexity of natural world on Earth with herbs, plants, animals, fish insects– our planetary system with the sun and carefully crafted planets, planet satellites– the galaxies, galaxy clusters– the whole Univers– the foundation of the material world from atomic and sub-atomic particles, the amazing chemical elements that are used to make the organic and in-organic substances– the amazing chemical and physical properties of the basic organic elements: hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus as well as substances like water...What can ID say about the NATURE of the designer (or designers)?...He is extremely powerful, wise, inventive, creative and showing these abilities on a much, much, much greaer scale we ever saw them in humans. May we speculate also that He is “loving” if he created us with our own abilities and placed us in such an amazing natural world and Universe?...We cannot contradict the epistle to Romans that clearly says:...“….since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” (emphasize added)...Romans 1, 19-20.

(ellipses added to make the quote work)

My first question, is about this--

Quote

What can ID say about the NATURE of the designer (or designers)?...He ...

--------------"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

2InVivoVeritasOctober 15, 2012 at 5:28 pmJonathan MI.D. itself, of course, has nothing to say about the nature or identity of the designer — these are inherently secondary metaphysical questions...We appreciate bringing to our attention the pronouncements of these very prominent christian / ID personalities. But I would appreciate if you can forgive me for expressing some criticism on the final statement in your text....I think we commit a common error when we say that “ID has nothing to say about the nature of the designer”. I believe ID is in a position to say some substantial things about the “nature of the designer” – assuming that the designers for the following are one and the same designer:...– the miracle of life– cells, tissues, organs, brains, eyes, vision systems, whole organisms– the humans – the beauty of the human body and human face– the miracle of human reason, thinking, conscience and soul– planet Earth with its metallic, magnetic core, tectonic plates, oceans– multiplicity of wonderfully inter-related echo system on our planet– the beauty and complexity of natural world on Earth with herbs, plants, animals, fish insects– our planetary system with the sun and carefully crafted planets, planet satellites– the galaxies, galaxy clusters– the whole Univers– the foundation of the material world from atomic and sub-atomic particles, the amazing chemical elements that are used to make the organic and in-organic substances– the amazing chemical and physical properties of the basic organic elements: hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus as well as substances like water...What can ID say about the NATURE of the designer (or designers)?...He is extremely powerful, wise, inventive, creative and showing these abilities on a much, much, much greaer scale we ever saw them in humans. May we speculate also that He is “loving” if he created us with our own abilities and placed us in such an amazing natural world and Universe?...We cannot contradict the epistle to Romans that clearly says:...“….since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” (emphasize added)...Romans 1, 19-20.

(ellipses added to make the quote work)

My first question, is about this--

Quote

What can ID say about the NATURE of the designer (or designers)?...He ...

How'd you get a He out of those semi-scientific statements?

I have to agree with jonathan M (or is it InVivoVeritas?) on one point. I too think that the echo system on our planet is wonderful. It makes shouting in canyons much more fun.

Oh, and it's obvious by what jonathan said that ID isn't a religious agenda. Oh "God" no.

Edited by The whole truth on Oct. 15 2012,22:43

--------------Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

Patterson said that when Dembski’s questionable statements came to light, he convened a meeting with Dembski and several high-ranking administrators at the seminary. At that meeting, Dembski was quick to admit that he was wrong about the flood, Patterson said.

“Had I had any inkling that Dr. Dembski was actually denying the absolute trustworthiness of the Bible, then that would have, of course, ended his relationship with the school,” he said.

--------------And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Patterson said that when Dembski’s questionable statements came to light, he convened a meeting with Dembski and several high-ranking administrators at the seminary. At that meeting, Dembski was quick to admit that he was wrong about the flood, Patterson said.

“Had I had any inkling that Dr. Dembski was actually denying the absolute trustworthiness of the Bible, then that would have, of course, ended his relationship with the school,” he said.

As the great philosopher said:

"Those are my principles: if you don't like them, well, I have others".

Patterson said that when Dembski’s questionable statements came to light, he convened a meeting with Dembski and several high-ranking administrators at the seminary. At that meeting, Dembski was quick to admit that he was wrong about the flood, Patterson said.

“Had I had any inkling that Dr. Dembski was actually denying the absolute trustworthiness of the Bible, then that would have, of course, ended his relationship with the school,” he said.

As the great philosopher said:

"Those are my principles: if you don't like them, well, I have others".

JFC what a suck hole. Absolutely less than zero integrity. I'll bet even Gordon wouldn't sink that low.

Getting away from AtBC was good for me. It was a needed break. I've been away for what, 4 years or so?

I'm going way out on a limb here and guessing that the numbsculls at UD and the DI etc failed to do any groundbreaking research in biology in that time?

Have I missed anything interesting?

Dude! Welcome back!

We were just reminiscing about the AFDave TARD graph...

Maybe my best moment here. Ahh, memories.

It's possible you also missed the whole "Weasel Wars" episode, where KF declared all sorts of patent nonsense to accuse Richard Dawkins of cheating with his little BASIC program running on his BBC Micro.

This lead to the coining of the terms 'latching', 'semi-latching' and, when KF was shown indisputably that RDs program had no need to do any such thing: 'Quasi-latching'.

So UD held a competition where they announced a prize for anyone who provided Richard Dawkins' Weasel code. Read that thread - it is ... well ....

What followed was one of the most pitiful and embarrassing episodes at UD where, because of course no-one was able to ante-up the original Weasel code, they declared that someone else's code was to be taken henceforth as the de facto program for Weasel.

Quote

Unless Richard Dawkins and his associates can show conclusively that these are not the originals (either by providing originals in their possession that differ, or by demonstrating that these programs in some way fail to perform as required), we shall regard the contest as closed, offer Oxfordensis his/her prize, and henceforward treat the programs below as the originals.

What a bunch of pompous loons.

--------------Joe: Most criticisims of ID stem from ignorance and jealousy.Joe: As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people.Byers: The eskimo would not need hairy hair growth as hair, I say, is for keeping people dry. Not warm.

Getting away from AtBC was good for me. It was a needed break. I've been away for what, 4 years or so?

I'm going way out on a limb here and guessing that the numbsculls at UD and the DI etc failed to do any groundbreaking research in biology in that time?

Have I missed anything interesting?

Dude! Welcome back!

We were just reminiscing about the AFDave TARD graph...

Maybe my best moment here. Ahh, memories.

It's possible you also missed the whole "Weasel Wars" episode, where KF declared all sorts of patent nonsense to accuse Richard Dawkins of cheating with his little BASIC program running on his BBC Micro.

This lead to the coining of the terms 'latching', 'semi-latching' and, when KF was shown indisputably that RDs program had no need to do any such thing: 'Quasi-latching'.

So UD held a competition where they announced a prize for anyone who provided Richard Dawkins' Weasel code. Read that thread - it is ... well ....

What followed was one of the most pitiful and embarrassing episodes at UD where, because of course no-one was able to ante-up the original Weasel code, they declared that someone else's code was to be taken henceforth as the de facto program for Weasel.

Quote

Unless Richard Dawkins and his associates can show conclusively that these are not the originals (either by providing originals in their possession that differ, or by demonstrating that these programs in some way fail to perform as required), we shall regard the contest as closed, offer Oxfordensis his/her prize, and henceforward treat the programs below as the originals.

What a bunch of pompous loons.

Gordon basically proceeded to define latching in ways that covered any change in a system, declared victory, and proceeded to shout at everyone.

Really I can't do all his shit justice, he lost me when some statue of a naked male African slave near some rum shop on a malaria infested volcanic island near Cuba sent him into a prolonged spleen venting and apoplexy of his finger tips from keyboard bashing for several weeks... it probably had a bigger dick than him.

Not to mention his wife pointing out a show on TV that had girls pussies on it which caused the entire Constabulary of Mont Serrat to shut up shop until he went home.

My current fave (though I admit bias) is his downloading of pics from my photography site and allegedly carrying them off to the Montserrat authorities, claiming the models look underage to his (I'm sure very reliably and professionally) trained eye. I'm not sure what he thought the Montserrat cops could or would do, other than arrest him for possession of "kiddie porn" (in his own mind).

I don't think he's mentioned my website since I pointed that out and offered to meet him in either criminal or civil court, his choice.

--------------Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecatedI think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Currently, my adoptive nation (my wife being the native Montserratian) has less than 5,000 people here, post volcano; just under 2,000 of these are recent Caribbean immigrants.

And there has been a second incident — no damage or fatalities, a plane ran off the runway — this morning, leading to grounding the airline in a week when the ferry is also not running. A second airline and charters will I believe take up slack.

So, pardon not much of a response just now.

KF

What does any of that have to do with KF?

I can only think of one thing: They've recruited KF as a hot air source to inflate the balloons that will be used to ferry people across to Antigua while the airline is grounded.

Edited by keiths on Oct. 16 2012,16:05

--------------And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G